"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:47:13 on Fri, 3 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:
A bit silly to rely on polls when the overwhelming majority rejected
any
exit which would make them poorer.

how do you know this?

I've never seen reports of a survey that asked

There's been a recent poll which indicates (iirc)

where?

Don't remember.

that sufficient Brexiters to have swung the vote believed they wouldn't
be poorer, but that it's obvious they will be,

why it is obvious that THEY will be?

Exchange rates,

OK I'll give you that

loss of EU grants,

most of these will carry on out of HMG's budget

trade barriers,

Not yet confirmed

tim

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:06:44 on Fri, 3 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:

I think you are unwilling to engage because you simply don't understand
what being a member of the CU brings us (which ISTM just proved my other
point that few people understand its significance)

I'm unwilling to engage, because I'm sick of talking to brick walls.

Oh come on

I've made a substantive new point and you ignored it

you can't respond like that and expect it to be accepted

tim

In article , (tim...)
wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

In message , at
14:52:24 on Wed, 1 Feb 2017, remarked:
Membership of EFTA requires remaining in the SM with FoM

So not really a Brexit at all.

Not what Norway think.



http://openeurope.org.uk/intelligenc...e/norway-and-s
witzerland/

An anti-EU group, I see. Norway and Switzerland are in the Schengen
zone which is not part of this discussion.

Why would we be different?

If we were the same, it wouldn't be a Brexit in any sense that was
campaigned for.

Not a universal view, especially as expressed before 23rd June 2016.

I'm fed up with arguing what people did or didn't vote for when there
are polls which show conclusively that the "leave" people wanted a
hard Brexit by a country mile (an order of magnitude more than the
winning vote margin) and also closer examination shows the various
"Norway/Singapore" soft Brexits were never a realistic proposition.

A bit silly to rely on polls when the overwhelming majority rejected any
exit which would make them poorer.

how do you know this?

I've never seen reports of a survey that asked

A series of polls, mostly asking how much people would pay themselves for
leaving EU. Very few willing to pay anything non-trivial.

All I have see is politicians spouting it like its "obvious" (which
to them, it is) (and then misusing it to imply that no-one voted for
anyone to be poorer)

The whole debate has been so dominated by fantastic promises, especially
from Brexiters, that paradoxical poll positions have been inevitable.

As it is with staying in ("to change it" as just one example)

Not as much but not entirely absent, I concede. And consequences of leaving
will undoubtedly be far worse.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (tim...)
wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

In message , at 12:29:27 on Thu, 2 Feb
2017, tim... remarked:
Membership of EFTA requires remaining in the SM with FoM

So not really a Brexit at all.

Not what Norway think.

that's not what I read

All the negatives of being in, but none of the positives

sorry, can't find a link

I didn't say they liked it, just that they know they are NOT in the
EU.

Only in the box ticking sense on not being in

The point is that many of them say "it feels like we are in,

still get to pay, still get to follow orders from Brussels, still
have freedom of movement

Except on fishing.

big deal!!!!!

It is in Norway!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 12:31:53 on Fri, 3 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:
I think you are unwilling to engage because you simply don't
understand what being a member of the CU brings us (which ISTM just
proved my other point that few people understand its significance)

I'm unwilling to engage, because I'm sick of talking to brick walls.

Oh come on

I've made a substantive new point

No, it's all very old news.

and you ignored it

you can't respond like that and expect it to be accepted

--
Roland Perry

In message , at 12:30:28 on Fri, 3 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:
that sufficient Brexiters to have swung the vote believed they
wouldn't be poorer, but that it's obvious they will be,

why it is obvious that THEY will be?

Exchange rates,

OK I'll give you that

loss of EU grants,

most of these will carry on out of HMG's budget

Extraordinarily unlikely. I don't know how many grants you've applied
for from Westminster vs Brussels, but the latter go through as a tedious
but somewhat inevitable bureaucratic process once the point of the grant
category has been established.

The former have to be fought tooth and nail as special cases, even when
funds have allegedly been allocated to the subject, except what they
fail to say is that by the time they announce "funding for..." it's all
been allocated to their pre=chosen acolytes.

trade barriers,

Not yet confirmed

But inevitable.
--
Roland Perry

wrote

Not what Norway think.

The point is that many of them say "it feels like we are in,
still get to pay, still get to follow orders from Brussels, still
have freedom of movement
but don't get Vote"

Except on fishing.

No Common Fisheries Policy, No Common Agricultural Policy

So cheaper NZ Butter & Lamb ?

"Take Control of Borders" just like Trump.

--
Mike D

"tim..." wrote in message
news


wrote in message
...
In article , (tim...)
wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

Membership of EFTA requires remaining in the SM with FoM

So not really a Brexit at all.

Not what Norway think.

that's not what I read

All the negatives of being in, but none of the positives

sorry, can't find a link

I didn't say they liked it, just that they know they are NOT in the EU.

Only in the box ticking sense on not being in

The point is that many of them say "it feels like we are in, but don't get
Vote"

and it just happens that,

from yesterday's papers, here's someone (from Norway) saying it:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...t-want-inside/

(full article available)

tim

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:31:53 on Fri, 3 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:
I think you are unwilling to engage because you simply don't understand
what being a member of the CU brings us (which ISTM just proved my other
point that few people understand its significance)

I'm unwilling to engage, because I'm sick of talking to brick walls.

Oh come on

I've made a substantive new point

No, it's all very old news.

We aren't discussing whether it is new or old news

we are discussing your claim that it is a sideshow (well I am discussing
it, you are just dismissing it)

It isn't

tim

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:30:28 on Fri, 3 Feb 2017,
tim... remarked:
that sufficient Brexiters to have swung the vote believed they
wouldn't be poorer, but that it's obvious they will be,

why it is obvious that THEY will be?

Exchange rates,

OK I'll give you that

loss of EU grants,

most of these will carry on out of HMG's budget

Extraordinarily unlikely. I don't know how many grants you've applied for
from Westminster vs Brussels, but the latter go through as a tedious but
somewhat inevitable bureaucratic process once the point of the grant
category has been established.

The former have to be fought tooth and nail as special cases, even when
funds have allegedly been allocated to the subject, except what they fail
to say is that by the time they announce "funding for..." it's all been
allocated to their pre=chosen acolytes.

trade barriers,

Not yet confirmed

But inevitable.

not if we stay in the Customs Unions

all of the barriers to trading with the EU are erected by the Custom's
Union, not the Single Market rules

tim